May 31. 1851.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



427 



same time acquaint me with the best edition of his 

 work? There \v;i3 cue 2)rinti.'d at Antwerp in 

 1605. J. S. P. (a Subscriber.) 



[Our correspondent will find a notice of Versteijan's 

 work in page S5. of this volume. The first edition 

 was printed at Antwerp in 1605, and was ruprinted at 

 London in 4to. in 163 1, and in 8vo. in 1655 and 1673. 

 The first edition is deservedly reckoned the best, as 

 well on account of containing one or more engravings, 

 afterwards omitted, as also for the superiority of the 

 plates, those in the subsequent editions being VL'ry 

 inrlifferent copies. No portrait of the author is noticed 

 either by Granger or Bromley.] 



liot/al Library. — In the new edition of Boswell's 

 Life of Johnson (published by the proprietors of 

 the Illustrated London News'), in the Nutiomd Il- 

 lustrated Library, the editor, in reference to the 

 library of Kinnj George III. (which is generally 

 understood to have been presented to the nation 

 by George IV., and which is recorded to have 

 been given, in an inscription placed in that magni- 

 ficent hall), has ap[)ended the following note : — 



" It has recently transpired that the government of 

 the day bought the library of George IV., just as he 

 was on the eve of concluding a sale of it to the Enipeix>r 

 of Russia." 



Can any of your readers inform me if this is 

 correct, and whether the nation have really paid 

 for what has always been considered a most worthy 

 and munificent present fi-om a monarch to his 

 subjects ? I trust to hear that the editor has been 

 misinformed. J. S. L. 



[The nation certainly never paid one farthing for 

 this munificent present. Tlie Russian Governinent 

 offered, we believe, to purchase the library ; and this 

 is probably the origin of the statement in the note 

 quoted by our correspondent.] 



HUGH HOLLAND AND HIS WOBKS. 



An accidental circumstance having led me to 

 re-peruse the article entitled Hugh Holland and 

 his works (Vol. ii., p. 2G5.), I feel myself called 

 on, as a lover of facts, to notice some of the state- 

 ments wliich it contains. 



1. " Me was born at Denbigh in 1.558." He 

 was born at Denbigh, but not in 1558. In 1625 

 he thus e.xprcssed himself: 



" Why was llie fat:ill spinster so vnthrifty ? 



To draw my third four ycares to tell and fifty ! " 



2. " In 1582 he matriculated at Eaiiol College, 

 Oxford." lie did not (juit Westminster Scliool 

 till 1589. If lie ever pursued his studies at Baliol 

 College, it was some ten years afterwards. 



3. "About 1590 he succeeded to a fellowship at 

 Trinity College, Cambridge." lu 1589 he was 

 elected j'roia Westminster to a scholarship in 



Trinity College, Cambridge — not to n, fellowship. 

 At a later period of life, he may have succeeded 

 to a fellowship. 



4. "Holland published two works: \. Monw 

 menta sepulchralia Sancti Pauli, London, 1613, 4to. 

 2. A cypress garland etc., London, 1625, 4to." 

 Hugh Holland was not the compiler of the first- 

 named work : the initials H. H admit of another 

 interpretation. This, however, is a very pardon- 

 able oversight. I could give about twenty au- 

 thorities for ascribing the work to Hugh Holland. 



5. The dates assiiiiied to the Monumenta Sancti 

 Paidi are " 1613, 1616, 1618, and 1633" Here 

 are three errors in as many lines. The first edition 

 is dated in 1614. The edition of 1633, which is 

 entitled Ecclesia Sancti Pavli illcstraia, is the 

 second. Xo other editions e.xist. 



6. " Holland also printed a copy of Latin verses 

 before Alexander's Roxana, 1632." No such work 

 exists. He may have printed verses before the 

 Roxana of W. Alabaster, who was his brother- 

 collegian. 



The authorities which I have consulted are 

 Fuller, Anthony ^ Wood, Henry Holland, son of 

 the celebrated Philemon Holland, Hugh Holland, 

 and Joseph Welch ; and in submitting the result 

 of my researches to critical e.xamiiiation, I must 

 commend the writer of the article in question for 

 his continued efforts to produce new fitcts, and to 

 explode current errors. 



Insensible as modern critics may be to the 

 poetical merits of Hugh Holland, we find him de- 

 scribed by Camden as one of the most pregnant 

 wits of those times; and he certainly gave a notable 

 proof of his wit — for fame is that which all hunt 

 aftei — in contributing some lines to il/r. William 

 Shah?spea?-es comedies, histories, and tragedies. 



On that account, if on no other, the particulars 

 of his life should be inquired into and recorded. 

 His Cypress garland, a copy of which I ])ossess, is 

 rich in autobiographical anecdote ; and I have 

 collected some of his fugitive verses, a specimen 

 of which may amuse. As one of the shortest, I 

 transcribe the lines v/hich he addressed to Giles 

 Farnabv, a musical comiioser of some eminence, on 

 the publication of his Canzonets to fowre voyces, 

 A.D. 1598. 



" M. Hu. Holland lo tlie author. 

 I would both sing thy praise, and praise thy singing, 

 That in the winter no'.ie are both a-springing ; 

 Rut my muse must be stronger, 

 And the daies must be longer. 

 When the sutme 's in his bight with )• bright Rar- 



n;iby. 

 Then bhould we sing thy praises, gentle Farnaby." 



Bolton Corney. 



